A normative argument against explosion

Mark Pinder

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

226 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

One strategy for defending paraconsistent logics involves raising ‘normative arguments’ against the inference rule explosion. Florian Steinberger systematically criticises a wide variety of formulations of such arguments. I argue that, for one such formulation, Steinberger's criticisms fail. I then sketch an argument, available to those who deny dialetheism, in defence of the formulation in question.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)61-70
Number of pages10
JournalThought: A Journal of Philosophy
Volume6
Issue number1
Early online date3 Feb 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Mar 2017

Keywords

  • Paraconsistent logic
  • Explosion
  • Normative
  • Reason
  • Bridge principle

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A normative argument against explosion'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this